Obama’s Afghanistan waffle
Bill Roggio reports on the consequences of Obama’s Afghanistan waffle:
Within 24 hours of the leak of the Afghanistan assessment to The Washington Post, General Stanley McChrystal’s team fired its second shot across the bow of the Obama administration. According to McClatchy, military officers close to General McChrystal said he is prepared to resign if he isn’t given sufficient resources (read “troops”) to implement a change of direction in Afghanistan…
…Today, the military is perceiving that the administration is punting the question of a troop increase in Afghanistan, and the military is even questioning the administration’s commitment to succeed in Afghanistan. The leaking of the assessment and the report that McChrystal would resign if he is not given what is needed to succeed constitute some very public pushback against the administration’s waffling on Afghanistan.
***
The Washington Post blasts the wavering, too:
IT WAS ONLY last March 27 that President Obama outlined in a major speech what he called “a comprehensive new strategy for Afghanistan” that, he added, “marks the conclusion of a careful policy review.” That strategy unambiguously stated that the United States would prevent the return of a Taliban government and “enhance the military, governance and economic capacity” of the country. We strongly supported the president’s conclusion that those goals were essential to preventing another attack on the United States by al-Qaeda and its extremist allies.
So it was a little startling to hear Mr. Obama suggest in several televised interviews on Sunday that he had second thoughts. “We are in the process of working through that strategy,” said on CNN.” The first question is … are we pursuing the right strategy?” On NBC he said, “if supporting the Afghan national government and building capacity for their army and securing certain provinces advances that strategy” of defeating al-Qaeda, “then we’ll move forward. But if it doesn’t, then I’m not interested in just being in Afghanistan for the sake of being in Afghanistan.”
…It’s hard to see, however, how Mr. Obama can refute the analysis he offered last March. “If the Afghan government falls to the Taliban or allows al-Qaeda to go unchallenged,” he said then, “that country will again be a base for terrorists who want to kill as many of our people as they possibly can.” Afghanistan, he continued, “is inextricably linked to the future of its neighbor, Pakistan,” where al-Qaeda and the Taliban now aim at seizing control of a state that possesses nuclear weapons. Moreover, Mr. Obama said, “a return to Taliban rule would condemn their country to brutal governance . . . and the denial of basic human rights to the Afghan people — especially women and girls.”
“To succeed, we and our friends and allies must reverse the Taliban’s gains, and promote a more capable and accountable Afghan government,” Mr. Obama concluded. As Gen. McChrystal’s report makes very clear, keeping faith with that goal will require more troops, more resources and years of patience. Yet to break with it would both dishonor and endanger this country. As the president put it, “the world cannot afford the price that will come due if Afghanistan slides back into chaos.”
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Afghanistan
Pundit & Pundette
» Reports of Broder's retirement greatly exaggerated
AmSpecBlog
» The Road Ahead in the Health Care BattleNewsBusters.org
» Harry Reid Rips WaPo's David Broder On Senate FloorLegal Insurrection
» Yes, It Really Is That BadRiehl World View
» Burka Barbie w/ Western Outfits And Removable Head?Stop The ACLU
» It’s Burkha Barbie! No, Seriously. I’m Not Kidding. Really
Obama’s Cuba moment?
I wonder if this is the beginning of a trickling effect of a large number of resignations among command grade officers. Similar to what happened under Clinton. Although most of the officers retiring in the 90’s were in part due to economic opportunities in the civilian sector. I fear this wave of retirements will be mostly due to a CIC who seems to be hostile to the troops under his charge.
The anti-war left wants another Viet Nam style loss to crow about … We can only hope that BO doesn’t give it to them … but I can pretty much guarantee that if he doesn’t send the additional troops that he is finally toast and 2010 will be an even bigger rebuttal of him and his nutroots supporters in Congress …
Meanwhile we can only pray that the brave men and women on the ground don’t pay a price for this president’s egotistical ineptitude …
I really do feel sorry for our men and women who are defending our nation and fighting in foreign countries. IMO, they have not a clue what this bho is doing to help them. I thank All who in our military and ask God to protect them.
L
Just another ineptness card to add to Obama’s resume. Everyone is now aware that he is the most inexperienced, narcissistic President this country has ever seen. He even seems to surpass Jimmy Carter.
I feel sorry for them, too. It would be like a doctor doing surgery with half of the instruments needed, construction workers who could only use a rock to hammer nails.
We dishonor our military by not letting them do the job the way they know how to do it and with the intent of finishing it.
God bless our military and their families!
I feel so bad for our military. This sucks.
In a state of emergency, can our military ever just do what they need to do, without consent of a dipsh!t president? I know it’s unprecedented, but these are dangerous times, and we’ve never had a “president” as idiotic and terrorist-enabling as the One we have now.
carter was the most inept cinc in my lifetime, he was utterly clueless, but next to zero carter was a military genius. zero will never be cinc material, for one he hates the military and what he knows about the military even as the poser in chief he can put in a thimble and still have room for the space shuttle.
This is a meat grinder! He cut spending and knew exactly what he was doing last Feb!
Be careful of giving Obummer a hard time. He could force us all to buy war bonds and if we refuse he could have the IRS charge us a “fee”.
First (well not really) we have the WH making the job impossible with their ROE. Now we get “I’ll think about it” while the troops in harms way may pay with more of their lives.
What can one expect form a Chicago thug who won his Senate seat by eliminating his competition. The only thing he ever committed himself to winning was the Presidency.
our men and women deserve better. they need a real leader not some crap shoot, overhyped, way over his head, joke. the man’s job as cinc is still vacant.
Today? No, I suspect they have known this all along. Obama could not care less about protecting the American people from terrorism.
In the end, it will all come down to protecting his image. If he can protect his image by staying he will stay. If he can protect his image by cutting and running he will cut and run.
The troops, the American people and the Afghan people don’t matter at all to him…
” . . . questioning the administration’s commitment to succeed in Afghanistan . . . ”
Huh?
Why has this question taken seven and a half years to be asked? I suppose the question may have been asked when our efforts in Afghanistan were neglected to be funded a couple of years back.
How long has it taken us to get to this point, and taking Pres Obama to task after being at the helm for nine months, is considered wisdom? Yep, it is his job and he is now responsible. But, his strategy must be the right one, and he better get it right. The strategy from where we started to where we are now has not worked out particularly well, has it?
The mismanagement and under resourcing that we have experienced in Afghanistan should not escape anyone. The mess has to be cleaned up. We lost the initiative, momentum and any goodwill we may have had.
We have been at this for seven years and a little more time to get it right, once and for all, should not be a reason to take Pres Obama to task for wanting to do so.
Heck, I’d like to see the rules of engagement changed, as part of the new strategy, that will allow for a philosophy that says, ‘kill ‘em all and let Allah sort them out’.
No more smart bombs, just big dumb ones.
*****
Support the Troops. Enlist.
It’s not just troops. The Obama administration is preventing the Energy Dept and Agriculture Dept and other departments from assisting the military with local problems that are key to winning local support. It looks to me that Obama is trying to look strong with his rhetoric and posturing but starving our soldiers of support. In the end, he will blame the military for failure.
Obama is like Hugo Chavez, providing the leadership and inspiration while his incompetent ministers and generals fail him and the people. This is really getting old.
I expect major fireworks very soon. This is not going to go over well with Americans.
i agree with glenn beck who said this morning, either go to war to win with everything you have, kick butt, and leave. or 1 don’t go to war, or 2 get out. nation building isn’t our militaries job. that’s state department. that’s the u.n.’s mission.
Can we impeach this a-hole yet? Or do we need to get nuked first?
Words aren’t enough – you have to see this.
Hmmm… Can the President Obama of today throw the President Obama of last March under the bus?
It’s rather odd to see the man arguing with himself.
corona,
If you turn that shirt up-side-down it reads:
screw america
I smell waffles.
“Hey! Leggo my Eggo!”
I am a retired vet with 27 years active service, mostly in the areas of espionage and counter-espionage. I have a degree in National Security and Strategic Studies from the Naval War College. Never in my entire career did I run into such a complete idiot as this president when it comes to military operations. Indecision, stalling, and denying our troop commanders the assets they need to win this war is tantamount to murder. I do not think that the American People elected a Murderer-In-Chief. I am certain that they wanted a Commander-In-Chief. Mr. President, get commanding or get the hell out of the way and let the Military Professionals get the job done.
I suspect he’s not much interested in the commander-in-chief role. He’s much more interested in being a chief legislator than a chief executive.
We have a history since WW2 of bidding down our forces to levels that guarantee we will lose. It’s like we’re playing “Name that Tune” with our soldiers lives. One General says “I can win with 100,000 troops”. Another General says 50,000, and our administrations, whether Republican or Democrat, take the lower figure regardless of its credibility.
Let me get this straight: we need to rush porkulus (the economy will collapse tomorrow!), crap & tax (the planet has a fever!), and healthcare (millions are dying!) as fast as we can through Congress BUT we need to take our time and deliberate before we support the troops. We need to increase spending up the wazoo BUT we slash military spending while we are at war and our enemies are arming up.
In the meantime, some of our finest young men are dying for a president who can only lament about all the women grabbing his a$$.
Broken arrow! Broken arrow!!
I think it’s actually going to require tea parties to force this president to allow the military to do what it needs to get the job done in Afghanistan and Iraq. We cannot count on this administration for anything besides the ruination of this country. We owe it to those who have fought and died in these and past wars to win these conflicts and honor their sacrifices.
In his next post, zyzzyg will explain why George W. Bush is responsible for Napoleon’s loss at Waterloo in 1815.
Let’s see. Clinton guts the Army with his “peace dividend” and it Bush’s fault we don’t have enough troops to send to Iraq and Afghanistan at the same time.
Obama won’t send the troops we have to Afghanistan and it is Bush’s fault.
Do I see a common moronic thread running through the military analysis of zyzzyg?
“Hey, can I just finish my waffle?”
I think Obama thought his election/swearing in was going to be a moment like Ronald Reagan’s was….when Iran released the hostages…right after he took office.
The moment he Swore in…he probably thought the goat rapers would throw down their arms and evaporate into peaceful existence.
Also, the most advanced and sophisticated fighter ever, the F-22, which can fly circles around any existing fighter, is just a waste of money to Duh One.
This idiot is even more anti-military than Clinton was. And that’s saying something.
One of the things that NEVER happened during Vietnam was a senior commander publically resigning over the lunatic strategy they were trying to follow.
I hope that General McChrystal is willing to follow through on his threat and that others are willing to do so also.
Only two things matter; your mission and your people. If the higher authority has no desire to complete the mission, then your people become your mission. No soldier should die, because the CINC is a waffler.
I am still waiting for the US media to report on this story that had a McClatchy reporter observing this.
http://www.military.com/news/article/ambushed-marines-aid-call-rejected.html
More troops are not going to help when apparently there is a new rules of engagement policy from the Obama administration that is killing US soldiers now.
WH now stands for “Waffle House” …
No matter what he decides I don’t see how the people will believe him. Didn’t he just sell out our allies by pulling the missile defense from our NATO commitment ? Ask the people of Poland, Georgia and ….
Did you see the idiotic RoE in action recently when Marines in a firefight COULD NOT GET A FIRE MISSION FROM LOCAL ARTY! They had to wait hours for gunships to arrive. I think 4 Marines died because of these idiots running the show! Waffling is NOT the right word for this.
Support the troops my butt!
The best description I heard of the POTUS MARATHON, it was a mile wide But an INCH DEEP… This has to be the biggest mistake the AMERICAN VOTER has made in my lifetime… Watching the unfolding DRAMA about AFGHANISTAN, my new motto has to be, EITHER FIGHT TO WIN, OR GET OUT!!!
Pressto,
You beat me to it. That was exactly the link I was looking for but couldn’t find!
Thanks.
The initial taking of Afghanistan in 2001-2002 by Special Forces and Afghan militias was an historical victory. But, more kid gloves treatment is not a change in strategy – it would be more of the same. A change would mean 2 words: Arclight and Artillery.
Afghanistan is sparse and relatively unpopulated. I say we clear what Taliban/AQ we can, and treat them as rough as we can. Then overwatch closely the Pak border area.
Who knows what Gen McChrystal will do. I, personally, have a deep seated hard time with the lack of direction/actual debasemnent coming out of the WH when it comes to the war.
KCK,
I think you are missing a couple of key points here.
This administration will never agree to watching ANY border. It would be racist.
And if this administration won’t let Marines call in a fire mission when ambushed the certainly aren’t going to unleash Arclight.
Obambi still thinks if he apologizes enough these fanatics will love him…
Every Obama statement has a shelf-life. Sometimes it is a few months, sometimes it is a few minutes. To figure out what he really wants/intends you have to ask yourself what would Rev. Wright/Bill Ayers do?
Would either of them seriously want to win in Afghanistan? ROTFL.
Would either of them consider using the conflict as a distraction to the conservative opposition while they do any amount of evil elsewhere? You decide.
Appreciate your point, War Eagle. I felt the Afghanistan war turn south when Obama had nothing whatsoever to say for 11 days after his inauguration. No war waits eleven days.
Obama has too far to come to bring a coherent national objective to the war. He is, by all accounts, incapable.
I’m stating the right direction, based on the enemy, the terrain and the situation. And I only made Captain. Too bad our president is such a rank loser.
What kind of idiot President would miss an opportunity to ask Letterman what he should do?
***
HI PRENDAD–good post–Thank you for your military service and for defending our country.
***
I used to be a DemocRAT–until being drafted into the U.S. Army and watching President Lyndon Johnston throw away lives and lose the Vietnam War. I had thought the Korean War was just a random failure before. Then I realized that this is what liberals and Democrats bring on.
***
Win Afghanistan–with all it takes–in a few months. Or get out and do selective high tech bombing and Predator assassination strikes on valid targets. No long term “nation building” in this failed state.
***
President Obama (PBUH) is just looking for a way to “sugarcoat” his exit “strategy”. He has no desire to win–Afghanistan is just a distraction to his plans to turn the U.S.A. into the United Socialist States of Amerika.
***
John Bibb
***
*I think P-BO is confused about the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy; I believe he’s thinking, “don’t ask me to provide support for our efforts in Afganistan, and I won’t tell the people I’m trying to destroy our country”; I think that’s about right.
* As I have said before about Afganistan, it’s either overwhelming force, or get out!; Our military deserves no less.
Is an Afghani waffle made with leavening?
Let’s see, Obama reversed what he said last April about Poland and what he said last March about Afghanistan. Not to mention all of the other lies, tall tales and reversals of himself in other areas.
Is there anything he hasn’t reversed or lied about? The only conviction he seems to have is his own self-worship.
His behavior is treasonous. It’s his duty to protect the people and preserve the Constitution.
The ROE in Afghanistan makes me sick. My son is going over there in 2010. If we are still there. I told him with Obama as president, who knows what will happen in that time.
There have been so many deaths in Afghanistan since Obie took office and he shrugs? What kind of person is this?!
The terrorist plot in CO and NY this week that was foiled by the FBI should wake him up. What a fool. A dangerous, dangerous fool.
God forgive me, but I absolutely loathe this joke of a President. Friends and fellow soldiers are going to die due to his cowardice and ineptitude. And 52% of the American electorate made it happen. I really wish the President would sack up and do the right thing, but I don’t believe he gives a damn about America’s fighting men and women or the sacrifices they make.
Nope. Wrong again.
If that is your analysis, you are wrong again. We had enough troops to do both. The unfortunately reality is that our efforts in Afghanistan, as I said earlier, was mis-managed and under resourced.
When did our efforts begin in Iraq? How much time passed between the start of our efforts in Afghanistan and the start of our efforts in Iraq? In that window of time did we achieve what we set out to do? Did we ever have the troop levels in Afghanistan that we have had in Iraq? What has been our position and the central threat our military has been concerned with? Was it the Soviet Union, North Korea and China? Or, was it Venezuela, Somalia and Afghanistan?
Nope. It is not about troop levels. It is about executing and following through on the correct strategy. A strategy that will work. A strategy that is not neglected for seven years. A strategy that you remain committed to and tweak when necessary. A strategy that does not rely on double dealing allies like Musharraf.
Among the most ridiculous things I ever read. Why send more troops to continue a failed strategy? Get the stragtegy correct to achieve the goals that we have set for ourselves. And, those goals should not include nation building.
No, you are drinking kool aid.
If the question can be asked of Pres Obama after nine months in office, why can’t the same question be asked of Pres Bush after seven years of managing our efforts in Afghanistan?
” . . . questioning the administration’s commitment to succeed in Afghanistan . . . ”
Where was Pres Bush’s commitment to succeed in Afghanistan?
Many questions in this non ‘Pres Bush caused Napolean to loose at Waterloo’ post.
Go ahead put the kool aid down then cut, paste and answer them one by one.
There are many of us, myself included who retired rather than serve with anyone who believes that you can get a bully to stop beating on you and taking your stuff if you apologize profusely enough. Only an effete elitist who went to a pricey private school might believe this to be true. It was obvious he didn’t understand why Afghanistan was a holding action and Iraq was where we could ‘kick Al Qaeda and Jihadi butt’. The simple explanation is that amateurs study tactics and professionals study logistics. Afghanistan is a landlocked country that can only be supplied by an airbridge. It takes about everything the USAF can muster to keep the 68,000 or so currently in-country supplied. Raising that number will put a strain on their cargo aircraft and is an expensive proposition in terms of fuel. It was far easier to have Jihadis by the score infiltrating from Iran, Syria and elsewhere to Iraq where they could be detected, identified and destroyed by troops with good internal lines of supply and seaports that allowed bulk cargo to land fairly inexpensively.
I would bet that if McChrystal can’t get the troops he needs and the cooperation of the State Department, Commerce Department, Agriculture Department and several other departments in the Executive branch of government he won’t be able to create the security nor the political and economic changes necessary to succeed in counter-insurgency warfare. I’ll also be willing to bet my life that while he is waiting for Mr. Obama to make up his mind one way or another. Men and women in our and our allies armed services will pay the price in blood. But at the same time I get the feeling Mr. Obama unlike his predecessor doesn’t care one whit.
I’m glad this is one CinC I will never have to salute.
I’ll have to search for the speech President Bush gave in which he said this was going to be a different kind of war and it would last a very long time. I believe the majority of Americans understand this. It is not a war against nations, it is a war against an ideology. War is dangerous and it is messy. Those of us who understand the enemy, well, we “get it”. Turn the troops loose and let them do what they are trained to do. Let the generals lead and make the world a safer place.
Me too!
And thanks to you too rocketman!
Rick Prendergast
This tells me McChrystal was told his request for troops would be punted until after the health care crapola was passed.
Must keep the leftist nutballs on the reservation if he wants his Marxist bill passed.
I also wonder if Obama is trying to punt it because it doesn’t square with his “evil Americans do evil things to Muslims and I apologize” speech in Cairo.
Sending more troops would suggest he didn’t mean anything he said in his speech.
This poor excuse for a human being/president needs to spend a week in Marine (or any other military boot camp)… maybe he would make up his mind. SSgt Dan knew the government was not friendly to the military when he enlisted, but this has escalated into pure insanity. The blood of our men is already on OBs hands.
Yeah, zyg. I’ll go ahead and hold my breath and wait for victory as Odumbo plans out his brilliant stragety in Afghanastan.